Monaco’s players celebrate at the end of the UEFA Champions League round of 16 football match between Monaco and Manchester City at the Stade Louis II in Monaco on March 15, 2017. Pascal GUYOT / AFP
Manchester City have been fined 18,000 euros by UEFA for three offences during their Champions League tie with Monaco at the Etihad Stadium last month, European football’s governing body said on Friday.
City were found guily of three charges concerning a pitch invasion, the throwing of objects from the crowd and a delayed kick-off during the last-16 first leg match on February 21.
News of UEFA’s sanctions came on the same day that City accepted a misconduct charge from England’s ruling Football Association relating to the behaviour of their players during last weekend’s Premier League draw with Liverpool.
The FA charge related to the reaction of City players after Liverpool were awarded a disputed penalty early in the second half following a challenge by Gael Clichy on Roberto Firmino.
City continued to complain to referee Michael Oliver after James Milner scored from the spot to give the visitors a 51st-minute lead at the Etihad, delaying the restart of the game.
In a separate development, the FA published its reasons for imposing a £35,000 ($44,000, 41,000 euros) fine on City last month for breaching anti-doping rules.
Charges against City were levelled in January following an alleged third violation of ‘whereabouts’ rules in the last 12 months.
Clubs must provide accurate details of training sessions and player whereabouts so they are available for drug testing at all times.
City’s doping infractions included failing to inform the FA of an extra first-team training session on July 12, 2016, a first-team player missing a test on September 1 last year because the hotel address provided was no longer correct, and anti-doping officials being unable to test reserve players on December 7 because six of them had been given the day off without the FA being told.
The FA criticised City’s failure to heed previous warnings, saying: “It is no less concerning that in this case, despite the club being made aware of their breaches on two previous occasions (and) the resources available to the club, they failed to deal with these and implement a system to correct this.”